UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

To be honest i think the QEC will be great but i think we screwed up on the F35 Lighting we could of created our Aircraft much cheaper but instead i believe we should have brought about 300 F18 super hornet as this will equal about half the price of the F35 SO FAR and we would have more aircraft for defending as well as this as so many have been built there are plenty of spares cheap keeping maintence costs down. Also the F18 has electronic warfare capability's a capability which will be essential with all the uav's entering service.

The f18 have proven outstanding in combat and would save the MOD Billions in the long run and we could spend the rest of the money improving out navy as we have had half our fleet axed, or buying more helicopters for our troops in afghan.

---------- Post added at 10:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 PM ----------

To be honest i think the QEC will be great but i think we screwed up on the F35 Lighting we could of created our Aircraft much cheaper but instead i believe we should have brought about 300 F18 super hornet as this will equal about half the price of the F35 SO FAR and we would have more aircraft for defending as well as this as so many have been built there are plenty of spares cheap keeping maintence costs down. Also the F18 has electronic warfare capability's a capability which will be essential with all the uav's entering service.

The f18 have proven outstanding in combat and would save the MOD Billions in the long run and we could spend the rest of the money improving out navy as we have had half our fleet axed, or buying more helicopters for our troops in afghan.

asif iqbal said:

UK bought 5 Raytheon Sentinel aircraft for nearly £1 billion and they have only been in service for a few years and are said to be withdrawn from service after Afghan campagin is over, can u believe that!!! and its one hell of a aircraft!!!!!!!!!

Raytheon Sentinel

Click to expand...

Why the heck are these aircraft being withdrawn so early? What is to become of them? Selling? Mothballs? Reserve? Anyone know.

Crazy...and, IMHO, more embarrassement for the UK.

navyreco said:

F35 in Fleet Air Arm markings

Click to expand...

Very nice pic that...something to hold onto but it seems like it is going to be so long...IMHO, too long.

Jeff Head said:

Why the heck are these aircraft being withdrawn so early? What is to become of them? Selling? Mothballs? Reserve? Anyone know.

Crazy...and, IMHO, more embarrassement for the UK.

Click to expand...

i know its criminal Jeff, these aircraft are amazing and the RAF love them, they did a great job over Libya

they will probably sell them off or put them into storage, once they are withdrawn they can do what they like with them, so sad

it is examples like this that really make u angry that how goverment can just waste away tax payers money and get away with it

we have so many issues in UK and yet the goverment just blames the average working person and taxes us to death, when MPs and the like can just have a free rain to do what ever they want

we are close to paying £1.5 per litre in Scotland for fuel!!!! and its going up!! thats like $10 per gallon in US, all why? because goverment want more tax, the barrel of oil isnt even that expensive

Just my own two cents on some of the issues raised above.

CVF should have been CTOL from the beginning, of you're going to build a 67,000 ton CV you might as well have gone for cats and traps, this decision also effectively tied CVF and the F-35B together, if that version is canned then you've no air wing but CTOL gives you fallback options. According to the original plan the first carrier should have been in service by now, going CTOL would have meant that the RN could have bought or leased some legacy Hornets so that it's pilots could gain experience on USN carriers and deck crew could have been put through the American training programme. When the first CVF entered service the decision could have been taken as to the aircraft it could operate either Super Hornet or Rafale M. The Rafale is probably more capable but it has the disadvantage of having little common weapons with existing British aircraft, we'd either have to buy all the French kit or insert British systems that would take time and money do the SH is probably the better choice. A option to buy a squadron of F-35C's at a later date could have been left open.

Instead thing starting going wrong almost straight away, we got ourselves bogged down in two large scale, open ended commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the exact opposite of the Sierra Leone/Kosovo style interventions that CVF was intended to support. As the RN's contribution to these conflicts was minimal, it was the one that got its budget gutted to free up money. The order for CVF kept being deferred, pushing up the cost especially in 2008 when a further delay added over £1 billion to the cost. Things weren't helped by the decision to assemble the ships in Gordon Brown's constituency, as Obi Wan says above Harland and Wolff was the obvious choice and it would have enabled them to stay in shipbuilding instead of being turned into a Titanic theme park ;( This also made the Tories hostile to the entire project because to then it just looked like a vanity project for Brown.

Despite all this it should be stressed that the actual build of the ships is proceeding on time and on budget. It's the F-35's various problems and political bungling that have given CVF such a bad press.

On FRES, this is a project that really deserves to die but for some reason it hasn't been subjected to the same scrutiny as CVF and the Nimrod MRA 4. Apparently the original plan was to adapt surplus Warrior IFV's but the Household Cavalry, who have serious clout in the Army, wanted shiny new toys. Even then there are plenty of off the shelf armoured vehicles that could have been bought, Piranha, AMV, CV90 and Boxer but of course the MoD completely stuffed it up. Really everyone associated with this project should have been fired!

MARS is a piece of good news for the RN. The decision to build overseas is entirely because there isn't the capacity in Britain to build them on top of CVF, Astute and the start of the Type 26 project, the ships have been designed in Britain so those skills are preserved and the Koreans have a record of meeting contract prices and deadlines.

As for Sentinel, the only explanation I can think of is RAF internal politics.

UK politicans should be brought to international court of justice and held accountable for such crimes!!!

Click to expand...

excellent.. You and Obi Wan can be the Judge and prosecutor. I'm sure it would be a fair trail!

Obi Wan, what's going on here? Is this something confirmed in the british press or just another blunder by a single paper.

Paper: U.K. Reverting to STOVL JSF for its Carriers
Apr. 16, 2012 - 09:44AM | By ANDREW CHUTER

Britain’s military chiefs have unanimously backed a plan to switch back to the short take-off, vertical-landing (STOVL) version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to equip its aircraft carriers, a report in The Times newspaper said April 16.

The newspaper quotes unnamed officials as saying the “overwhelming case” from military chiefs for a change from the catapult-launched F-35C to the F-35B STOVL version could land on Prime Minister David Cameron’s desk this week.
A plan to revert to the B version has been under consideration for weeks in the face of mounting concern over the cost of converting the two 65,000-ton aircraft carriers now being built by a BAE Systems-led alliance to launch and recover the C version.
Some estimates put the figure at as much as 1.8 billion pounds ($2.85 billion).
Work on converting the first of the aircraft carriers now being built at yards across the U.K. to launch and recover F-35Cs has already begun and British pilots are already being seconded to U.S. Navy carriers to hone their flying skills. ...

Click to expand...

It seems it has yet to go over the PMs desk, so likely not final yet. But then again, it's the military advocating it. If I read the article correct, that is. Are military desicion makers so afraid of the program falling apart in the future due to budget constraints that they now rather take a less capable / effective plane to save some money in the short term and be sure they get at least something?
In also seems strange that such a conversion would cost £1.8B. But what do I know. However, if conversion work has already started as is said, it's a waste of money one way or the other.

Scratch said:

Obi Wan, what's going on here? Is this something confirmed in the british press or just another blunder by a single paper.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It seems it has yet to go over the PMs desk, so likely not final yet. But then again, it's the military advocating it. If I read the article correct, that is. Are military desicion makers so afraid of the program falling apart in the future due to budget constraints that they now rather take a less capable / effective plane to save some money in the short term and be sure they get at least something?
In also seems strange that such a conversion would cost £1.8B. But what do I know. However, if conversion work has already started as is said, it's a waste of money one way or the other.

Click to expand...

Beware premature postings by journos, to me this story has the feel of a rumour that has got out of hand. It may yet happen, but my own reading of the situation is different. SecDef Hammond was ready to announce this U-turn last month, purely on short term cost grounds (British Politicians as a rule have absolutely no understanding of military matters beyond how much they cost up front), then Cameron went on his Jolly to the States and it is generally believed Obama and his SecDef had a quiet word in Cameron's 'shell-like',to warn him off going anywhere near the 'B'. The US has plans, and they include a shift of their own naval forces away from the European theatre towards the Pacific. They need us and the French to shoulder more of the burden, which means fielding up to three carrier groups (CdG, QE and PoW) to replace those transferred to the US west coast and beyond. The US also plans to be able to cross deck to our carriers to bolster the air groups when on joint ops, meaning the ability to operate CATOBAR types like the F-35C, Hawkeye and Hornet is high on the list of requirements. Despite a great deal of scaremongering in the UK press in recent months about the cost of converting the carriers to Cat and trap, the US has released the true figures, £458million for the purchase of one shipset of EMALS cats and traps (two cats and three wires) plus £400million to install. Which kind of shoots down in flames the nonsense figure of £2billion per ship being bandied around by the 'headless chicken' brigade (pro RAF journos etc).

So, after the US tugged on Cameron's leash, the mid march announcement was cancelled and a 'review' of the costs was announced. Basically, I think this was to give the MOD a month or so to find justification for staying with CATOBAR and the 'C'. Too much political embarrassment for the ConDems if they reverse course again, they will be playing into Labour's hands for a start. The reality of the costs issue is that the C is cheaper than the B, by enough of a margin that for a given purchase of 50 F-35s, the savings from buying the C is enough to pay for the conversion to cat and trap of one carrier. Buy 100 and we can convert both and it is the same price as buying the B and not converting them. Converting them means we have much more flexible ships for the next fifty years for a start.

Also at the moment the F-35 is viewed by the RAF as the replacement for the Tornado in the long range strike role. Only the C comes close to meeting this requirement as it has much longer 'legs' than the B and bigger bomb/missile bays. I suspect the 'senior service chiefs' who want the B and STOVL configured carriers are only saying this because they think a. it is the only way to get both carriers into service, and b. the politicians might just start to believe the nonsense prices being quoted in the press and do something (else) stupid, like abandon the whole project (which will still have to paid for in full).

With politicians however, you can always count on them to do the stupid thing. I hope for once they surprise me and grow a brain cell.

A week is a long time in politics - Harold Wilson

Just read a similar piece in the FT about the possibility of the UK changing to the 'B', but this seemed a little more 'solid', as it is quoting comments made by UK officials to the French that the RN will not be modifying it's carriers to allow French naval jets to land and take-off from them (meaning cats and traps).

The costs for the modifications seem ludicrously high ay £1.8bn. You could build yourself a frigging new carrier for that kind of money! Even the original estimate of £400m seem like a bad joke considering the bloody carriers were supposed to have been designed and built with provisions for adding cats and traps on later.

WTF is going on here?

Obi Wan Russell said:

Beware premature postings by journos, to me this story has the feel of a rumour that has got out of hand.

The US has plans, and they include a shift of their own naval forces away from the European theatre towards the Pacific. They need us and the French to shoulder more of the burden, which means fielding up to three carrier groups (CdG, QE and PoW) to replace those transferred to the US west coast and beyond. The US also plans to be able to cross deck to our carriers to bolster the air groups when on joint ops, meaning the ability to operate CATOBAR types like the F-35C, Hawkeye and Hornet is high on the list of requirements.

With politicians however, you can always count on them to do the stupid thing. I hope for once they surprise me and grow a brain cell.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking it will be the "C". Be nice to have both of those beautiful UK carriers be able to be cross decked so directly. That would pave the way for UK E-2D Hawkeyes too and a much more powerful and versatile vessel.

I hope it transpires just that way and I look forward to it.